Taves
v. AIU Insurance Company [11/30/99] 1999 MTWCC 76 Where insurance
counsel moved to compel claimant to appear at a resumed deposition, WCC
considered the fact that said counsel had rejected the suggestion of claimant's
counsel to contact the WCC during deposition for resolution of the dispute,
rather than to terminate the deposition. The deposition was not ordered
resumed where the questions giving rise to the dispute were not reasonably
calculated to lead to admissible evidence and insurance counsel unilaterally
chose to terminate the deposition rather than seek an immediate ruling.

Tuma
v. Connecticut Indemnity Co. [10/16/96] 1996 MTWCC 96 Date for
deposition of physician (and trial date) vacated where claimant had resisted
production of certain medical records that were potentially relevant to
cross-examination of physician and WCC granted motion to compel production
of such documents. It was not likely discovery could be completed prior
to deposition or trial dates.

Stone
v. State Fund [8/1/96] 1996 MTWCC 57 Insurer moved to vacate trial
and compel deposition of pro se claimant who told insurer, "I, will
give no deposition, under oath, or otherwise." ARM
24.5.326 allows sanctions for failure to make discover. Motion to
vacate trial date and compel discovery is granted. Claimant is cautioned
that failure to submit to deposition may result in dismissal of petition
with prejudice.